Teaching Lab All Partners Report: Unmatched
2020-2021 Report
Background
In SY20-21, Teaching Lab administered online diagnostic and follow-up surveys of educators participating in Teaching Lab’s professional learning in order to measure growth and improvement in three different areas: 1) Educator Mindsets and Beliefs, 2) School Environment, and 3) Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge. There were 547 educators who completed the diagnostic survey, 120 educators who completed the follow-up survey, and 28 educators who completed both.
Summary of Results
Methodology and Presentation of Results
We have provided two types of results for each section: The results in the first three columns of the table refer to the overall group averages. We provide the group average for the diagnostic and follow-up surveys as well as the percentage point change (increase or decrease) over this time. It is important to note that the group that completed the diagnostic survey and the group that completed the follow-up survey are different in size. The results in the fourth column reflect the percentage of educators who improved their responses or sustained the highest level response from the diagnostic to follow-up survey. This group of educators is the same for both surveys and is smaller in size.
Section 1: Mindsets and Beliefs
Educators were asked a series of questions about their mindsets toward instruction and students on a 5-point Likert scale from 1- Strongly disagree to 5- Strongly agree. The questions focused on four core constructs surrounding mindsets and beliefs, specifically the recognition of race and culture, growth mindsets, high expectations, and taking accountability for equitable instruction.
1
| Educators’ Averages Scores on Equitable Mindsets and Beliefs, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with Equitable Mindsets & Beliefs | ||||
| Overall score | 68% | 71% | +3% | 80% |
| Recognition of race & culture | 33% | 34% | +1% | 52% |
| Holding growth mindsets | 53% | 61% | +8% | 74% |
| Having high expectations and beliefs | 96% | 94% | −2% | 96% |
| Taking accountability for equitable instruction | 92% | 93% | +1% | 97% |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 116 to 547
2
n = 116
|
||||
The plot illustrates educators’ average scores from the diagnostic and follow-up surveys, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the average scores.
Section 2: School Environment
Educators were asked about their school environment, including culture and climate on a 5-point Likert scale from 1- Strongly disagree to 5- Strongly agree. Specifically, educators were asked about trust and connectedness to other educators, their role in shaping their own professional learning, and confidence in implementing the curriculum in a way that maximizes positive impact for student learning.
2
| Educators’ Perceptions of School Culture and Climate, by Survey Administration, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with Positive Perceptions of School Culture and Climate | ||||
| Overall score | 66% | 64% | −2% | 84% |
| Trust in fellow teachers | 83% | 72% | −11% | 88% |
| Connectedness to fellow teachers | 75% | 70% | −5% | 90% |
| Have influence over professional learning | 36% | 38% | +2% | 67% |
| I am confident that I am implementing the curriculum in a way that maximizes positive impact for student learning | 68% | 74% | +6% | 90% |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 109 to 440
2
n = 109
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shifts in educators’ reported culture and climate, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the percentage of educators with positive perceptions in the diagnostic survey, and blue represents the percentage in the follow-up survey. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the percent of educators who agreed or strongly agreed with the items.
Section 3: Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Educators were asked a series of questions about their knowledge of instructional shifts and evidence-based instructional practices in their content area.
Section 3a: ELA Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge
In ELA, the questions focused on seven core constructs, as shown in the table.
| Educators’ Average Scores on ELA Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with ELA Content & Pedagogical Content Knowledge | ||||
| Overall score | 59% | 66% | +8% | 72% |
| ELA instructional shifts | 51% | 58% | +6% | 64% |
| Fluency | 52% | 58% | +7% | 65% |
| Text complexity | 58% | 73% | +15% | 79% |
| Close reading | 66% | 72% | +6% | 76% |
| Building knowledge | 52% | 67% | +15% | 74% |
| Supporting students with unfinished learning | 68% | 70% | +2% | 72% |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 69 to 408
2
n = 69
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shift in educators’ average scores for ELA content and pedagogical content knowledge, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease of average scores.
Section 3b: Math Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge
In Mathematics, the questions focused on four core constructs, as shown in the table.
| Educators’ Average Scores on Math Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with Math Content & Pedagogical Content Knowledge | ||||
| Overall score | 60% | 63% | +3% | 69% |
| Math instructional shifts | 53% | 53% | +0% | 62% |
| Equitable Math Instruction | 72% | 78% | +6% | 82% |
| Supporting students with unfinished learning | 65% | 72% | +7% | 75% |
| Effective Teaching Practices | 56% | 54% | −1% | 60% |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 51 to 129
2
n = 51
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shift in educators’ average scores for Math content and pedagogical content knowledge, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease of average scores.
Section 4: Teacher Practices
Coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were asked about the areas they focus on when observing teachers in general and also whether they observe differences in teaching practices between teachers who have participated in Teaching Lab professional learning and teachers who have not.
First, coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were asked whether they focus on the following areas when observing teachers: The lesson is focused on a high-quality text or task. The questions and tasks address the analytical thinking required by the grade-level standards. All students have opportunities to engage in the work of the lesson.
| Observation Practices of Coaches, Leaders, and Administrators, by Survey Administration, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Coaches, Leaders, and Administrators who Agreed or Strongly Agreed | ||||
| When observing teachers, I focus on… Overall score | 91% | 85% | −6% | 91% |
| Whether the lesson is focused on a high-quality text or task | 89% | 82% | −7% | 91% |
| Whether the questions and tasks address the analytical thinking required by the grade-level standards | 89% | 91% | +2% | 91% |
| Whether all students have opportunities to engage in the work of the lesson | 94% | 82% | −12% | 91% |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 11 to 107
2
n = 11
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shifts in coaches, leaders, and/or administrators’ reported observation practices, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the percentage who always or almost always focus on these aspects in the diagnostic survey, and blue represents the percentage in the follow-up survey. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the percent of educators who always or almost always focus on these aspects.
Coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were also asked to compare teaching practices between Teaching Lab participants and non-Teaching Lab participants in the follow-up survey. They were asked about the same three areas above.
| Differences in Teaching Practices between Teaching Lab Participants and Non-participants, as Reported by Coaches, Leaders, and Administrators | ||
|---|---|---|
| TL Teachers | Non-TL Teachers | |
| The lesson is focused on a high-quality text or task | 100% | 55% |
| The questions and tasks address the analytical thinking required by the grade-level standards | 82% | 0% |
| All students have opportunities to engage in the work of the lesson | 73% | 9% |
The graph illustrates the differences in teaching practices between teachers who have participated in Teaching Lab professional learning and teachers who have not, as reported by the coaches, leaders, and/or administrators.
Section 5: Lab Leaders
Lab Leaders were asked about their engagement in different activities, such as leading professional learning, leading PLC meetings, coaching teachers, sharing information and resources, and improving their own instructional practices.
| % of Lab Leaders who engaged in the activity | |
|---|---|
| Improve my own instructional practice | 17% |
| Lead PLC meetings for teachers, Coach teachers, Share information or resources with teachers, Improve my own instructional practice | 17% |
| Lead professional learning for teachers, Lead PLC meetings for teachers, Coach teachers, Share information or resources with teachers | 17% |
| Lead professional learning for teachers, Lead PLC meetings for teachers, Coach teachers, Share information or resources with teachers, Improve my own instructional practice | 50% |
The graph below illustrates the Lab Leaders participation in different activities.
Section 6: Student Work
No student work was analyzed at this location.
Section 7: Classroom observations
TBD
Section 8: Participant Feedback
Looking at participant feedback from All Partners we see good scores across the board:
| Teaching Lab Performance on Participant Feedback Questions for All Partners | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How Likely Are You To Apply This Learning To Your Practice In The Next 4-6 Weeks? | I felt a sense of community with the other participants in this course even though we were meeting virtually. | This course helped me navigate remote and/or hybrid learning during COVID-19. | % Who Say Activities Of Today's Session Were Well-Designed To Help Me Learn | S/He Effectively Built A Community Of Learners |
| 89% | 90% | 67% | 68% | 91% |
Finally, looking at the textual feedback from participants we also see a lot of positive feedback, even when people are giving tips for improvement
Comments on Improving Experience
[[1]]
[1] "<footer>Having my entire team in on the training and all in one room to better collaborate</footer>"
[[2]]
[1] "<footer>Some of the work took a long time. I have planning for my week and I was not able to complete some of the moodle activites on time. It was a lot of work</footer>"
[[3]]
[1] "<footer>Nothing you could do...I need my team to be on board and with me. I will try for next time.</footer>"
[[4]]
[1] "<footer>My bad, but I watched the entire second video which gave me a different IPG rating than others. Is there a way to only give a video the length you want us to see and associated materials? I felt very time pressured today during asynchronous work.</footer>"
[[5]]
[1] "<footer>I wish that we could have talked a bit more about how this would look in an online classroom.</footer>"
[[6]]
[1] "<footer>I think the only thing that I would try to improve is to have a folder where all the materials are rather than having to download everything then upload it back to the assignments. There is a lot of valuable, meaningful information here that I'd like to share with the teachers but having to download the videos and documents one by one will be time consuming for me. I want it all!</footer>"
[[7]]
[1] "<footer>I thoroughly enjoyed this experience. If I were to be hypercritical, while some specific feedback was indeed provided to teachers, I guess more individualized feedback to teachers could've improved the course.</footer>"
[[8]]
[1] "<footer>have one geared more toward little learners- my students find it extremely difficult to access and use some of the cool technology everyone suggest</footer>"
[[9]]
[1] "<footer>Maneuvering through some of the activities on the Moodle Platform were confusing.</footer>"
[[10]]
[1] "<footer>I can't think of any right now. Although, it was hard for me to navigate Nearpod.</footer>"Additional Comments
[[1]]
[1] "<footer>The training is definitely beneficial for all teachers regardless of one's years of experience.</footer>"
[[2]]
[1] "<footer>Definitely time well spent. Thanks to all who made this happen for us in Fort Dodge.</footer>"
[[3]]
[1] "<footer>I really liked the last couple sessions because that is when we took a closer look at the Eureka Curriculum. I would have liked more time planning with cohorts and even practicing lessons.</footer>"
[[4]]
[1] "<footer>Instructors should know in advance what materials the teachers actually have access to and remember, you have been navigating this material for a long time and we haven't. Nothing worse than struggling to find something that someone telling you how easy it is to find, to make you feel inadequate.</footer>"
[[5]]
[1] "<footer>I wish we would have touched on how to actually deliver day to day lesson instruction in a virtual setting.</footer>"
[[6]]
[1] "<footer>I wish the District could also offer us an advance training to learn more about this curriculum and required all teachers who are using the curriculum to attend.</footer>"
[[7]]
[1] "<footer>Thanks for helping me with getting excited about the new Math series This was the first \"inservice\" I had with Eureka.</footer>"
[[8]]
[1] "<footer>I would have rather had the course meeting times spread out so we were meeting once a week. It was a lot to do in 3 weeks.</footer>"
[[9]]
[1] "<footer>Dr, Anita shared her expertise with us throughout this course. Sharing her knowledge allowed us to actively engage in topics that were discussed as she was able to give us feedback on our discussions. Throughout this course, I was more open to discuss with my colleagues.</footer>"
[[10]]
[1] "<footer>The course is hard for me to navigate. I missed a week and now I feel lost in the course when I try to do my prep work. Not dedicating enough time to it with this crazy year, but I get distracted when I can't find what I need to do!</footer>"info@teachinglab.org
Comments on what Went Well